The head executive at Russellville’s water utility recently addressed the City Council about several looming expenditures.

City Corp. General Manager Steve Mallett told aldermen at the Council’s May meeting there must be ongoing discussions to detetermine the best way to fund these projects.

For 2014-18, there are more than $40 million in projected capital needs, he said. Of that, $20.8 million is for wastewater collection system improvements, $9.5 million for water treatment plant expansion and upgrades and $1.75 million for water distribution piping replacement.

During that period, only $7 million in capital funds is estimated to be generated, leaving a large deficit.

In addition to the capital projects, there are approximately $50 million in identified needs for unbudgeted future projects. These needs include $10.6 million in wastewater collection system improvements, $35 million in water pipe replacements and $4.3 million in fire flow improvements.

Mallett also noted City Corp. has a deadline of 2022 to achieve compliance in accordance with the federally mandated consent administrative order.

Not included in any of these projects are the identification and development of a secondary water source — the Huckleberry Reservoir is designed to meet the city’s water needs through 2035, wastewater plant improvements that may be necessary to address phosphorus limits or any other limits that may be imposed at a future date and a wastewater outfall line to the river as an alternative to future wastewater plant expansion.

Mallett also outlined funding options for these upcoming expenditures. First, he said City Corp. can utilize reserve funds, currently at $13 million. Mallett said if City Corp. tried to do a “pay as you go” approach to capital improvements, funds would be down to only $2.3 million after 2014.

He did suggest the reserve could be used to fund new debt issues such as bonds or loans. City Corp. staff is working with a consultant to look at ways to utilize these funds to fund capital improvements while maintaining a sufficient level of reserve funds.

Another funding proposal, Mallett said, would be to decrease expenses. This could be done by reducing annual operating and maintenance budgets by eliminating non-essential goods and services, evaluate staffing levels and evaluating professional services contracts; reducing annual capital budgets by prioritizing, eliminating or postponing projects that are non-critical, continuing to value engineer all current and future projects and utilizing in-house engineering and construction forces to design or construct smaller projects; or take advantage of energy efficiency incentive programs.

The third and final funding option Mallett presented was to increase revenues.

This could be done in several ways, including participating with the city in future sales tax campaigns, increase water sales, or modify water or wastewater rates and fees.

He noted services fees, such as late charges, have not been adjusted since the 1980s.